Sony a7S II vs Alexa Mini: blind test

Samuel H

Samuel H

Major Contributor
I love blind tests. And this one was TOUGH. I think I know which is which (I posted it on the comments on YT), but really, I was splitting hairs here, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_uT2IcRneg

Before anybody jumps at me: nobody is suggesting that the a7S II is just as good as an Alexa, or that big budget movies should be shot with these tiny cameras. It's just great to see there's such a small difference in image quality, that's it. Usability and reliability are completely different aspects, and I'm sure people shooting Alexa have strong opinions on this.

Also: I think the recent "shot on iphone" movies were just publicity stunts, it made no sense to me that they'd go for that, other than "because people will talk about it". But this reinforces the point that it's not gear that's holding any of us down.
 
I'm just appalled that a Rokinon lens ever found it's way onto an Arri!

Honestly though, watching on Youtube on a 15" screen I can barely tell them apart. I think none of the graded shots actually look nice, and I think they've very purposely not shown full-screen ungraded shots as that would be the big give away. If I had to guess I'd say Arri on the right?

I'd still choose the Mini every day of the week though, for reasons other than the image.
 
The answers are in the description in YT, and yes, I got it right, there's a clear difference. I just find it amazing that it's not a huge differnce.

And yes, I didn't care too much for the grading either. But the point remains: if I haven't shot an awesome feature film, it's not because I can't afford the gear. People could say that 20 years ago, but I can't use that excuse anymore.
 
Under natural light all cameras look good these days. Even cellphones.

Now go to some pitch black room, get a fresnel and a smoke machine and aim the fresnel to a person. THERE is the difference between an ALEXA and everybody else, those others standing at a miles distance in terms of DR and color (some of he latest RED being very very close though). Not just mirrorless, I include here ALL Canon C line as well as Sonys, Viper, Vari Panasonics, etc, etc

What I mean is that ARRIs look filmic under any circumstance, while pretty much all others look like video, specially under artificial light, which is what all drama/commercials are shot with.
 
Last edited:
Yes the A7SII is a good match, but I was not impressed with the color range of the scenes they shot or how they were graded. I'm guessing that the difference would be more obvious if they did a skin-tone test.
 
It's subtle here, but could definitely tell the Alexa right away (yet I was still slightly nervous checking my answer for fear of being tricked lol). But still, I think that is their point, so, point taken.

But there is a certain point where lens tests and camera tests like this or silly. If I shoot a cup of water perfectly lit at f/5.6 with a zeiss milvus VS an entry level $200 canon lens, and put them on YouTube, will you tell? And even if YOU can, will anyone care?

But that is not why we buy those lenses or what makes them better. It's about using the cameras at their limits: f/1.4 shooting into a lightsource. Lowlight. Heavy contrast, mixed lighting. Etc, etc. etc.

And in those conditions the differences often become very clear.

I will also say, too many of these types of tests focus too much on scientific comparisons. I know this statement may be ironic, but I often find them the least useful. What I would rather compare is two one minute videos shot by the exact same DP, all in natural light, to the best of their ability. It's more the overall impression of a camera or lens that leaves the lasting impact, not two slides side by side. Go shoot for a day in India with Alexa Mini and get the most beautiful shots possible, and then go again with the Sony and get the most beautiful shots possible, and then show me 1 minute of each and have me guess.

It's less scientific, yet IMO, ironically, more accurate.
 
From YT (lol):

"Not a single frame from this video looks like a frame from a movie. This is ridiculous. No Alexa camera looks as bad as this. Alexa footage is literally matched to be bad as Sony footage. Try another way around next time. Make real-life scenery​, shoot with Alexa, grade properly and then try to make the same image with Sony. It is impossible."

I would have to agree...always of course appreciate the effort though.

Here's a breath of fresh air: https://vimeo.com/236046849
 
"Go shoot for a day in India with Alexa Mini and get the most beautiful shots possible, and then go again with the Sony and get the most beautiful shots possible"

Well that is one place the Sony will shine because it can clear customs with no problem, while the Alexa Mini might get you stopped at the border and you may have to pay import duty as well as showing a work visa. There are a number of places where a small "consumer" looking camera will be the best choice such as shooting a documentary in a foreign location, but shooting a Feature film or commercial in a controlled location where one can use all necessary gear and a full crew, then the Alexa will win hands down every time. Do not get me wrong I own the sony and it does do an amazing job I love it but no way is it as good as a Alexa.
 
Haha yes that sums it up pretty well I think!

Rather than showing each at their best to compare the differences, it feels as though they've 'dumbed down' the Alexa footage a bit.
 
Yak said:
"Go shoot for a day in India with Alexa Mini and get the most beautiful shots possible, and then go again with the Sony and get the most beautiful shots possible"

Well that is one place the Sony will shine because it can clear customs with no problem, while the Alexa Mini might get you stopped at the border and you may have to pay import duty as well as showing a work visa. There are a number of places where a small "consumer" looking camera will be the best choice such as shooting a documentary in a foreign location, but shooting a Feature film or commercial in a controlled location where one can use all necessary gear and a full crew, then the Alexa will win hands down every time. Do not get me wrong I own the sony and it does do an amazing job I love it but no way is it as good as a Alexa.
Click to expand...

sure, though my point was more to say shoot in natural light in an uncontrollable environment... swap "india", then, with on the streets in your hometown! But i hear you, it's why I invest heavily in small/light m43.

I am just using that to illustrate that often times, when I do see a comparison of a 1 minute film back-to-back on something like Sony VS Alexa they are always skewed to try and show how capable the small cameras are. (Not a bad thing by the way, just not always helpful). IE often I will see a scene shot and lit for a Red, then very carefully shot and carefully lit for a GH4, as if to point out how similar they are. When that is not the point. In challenging situations differences become clear, and often, differences are better illustrated impressionistic from the combination of shots from a camera/lens VS a scientific test chart or careful setup slide.

Also, NorBro said it very well... garbage in, garbage out!
 
If someone produced a test wherein an Alexa and a Sony A7S-II showed that the footage was identical, I would probably consider hiring that guy on an A7S-II video shoot, but no way in hell would I hire him on an Alexa shoot.
 
Barry, sounds like a good way of recruiting for studios.

Tell applicants to go out and shoot a test that proves an A7sII is just as good as the Alexa.

Only hire the ones who reply with "It can't be done"!
 
I own an ikonoskop which I daresay rivals the alexa in filmic quality and the differences are as noted above - in circumstances where the lighting etc isn't ideal. With the ikonoskop i can go into my kitchen and it'll look really filmic and nice. With my a6500, same thing - looks like crap. Doesn't mean the a6500 can't be made to look good - it most definitely can. But it isn't even close. Having said that the winner of the golden lion last year at venice was shot on as7ii.
 
TheDingo said:
Looking at the trailer it could have been shot on almost anything. Not exactly a glowing testament to the A7SII...

Click to expand...

It is not a good looking movie as their was no production value - which goes to the point of using these cameras in less than ideal situations.
 
What all of this does not show is that if you go out and expose normally and then dig into the highlights, the Alexa will often continue to yield information 3, 4...even sometimes 5 stops higher. The A7SII will burn out very quickly beyond it's white threshold. The key difference between the Alexa and almost all cameras out there is LATITUDE. You can expose 3 stops under or 3 stops over and pull it back to an image that looks almost as if it was exposed normally. Almost no other camera I know can do this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top